Anita Sreedhar and Anand Gopal, writing for the New York Times:
Over the past four decades, governments have slashed budgets and privatized basic services. This has two important consequences for public health. First, people are unlikely to trust institutions that do little for them. And second, public health is no longer viewed as a collective endeavor, based on the principle of social solidarity and mutual obligation. People are conditioned to believe they’re on their own and responsible only for themselves. That means an important source of vaccine hesitancy is the erosion of the idea of a common good.
Americans began thinking about health care decisions this way only recently; during the 1950s polio campaigns, for example, most people saw vaccination as a civic duty. But as the public purse shrunk in the 1980s, politicians insisted that it’s no longer the government’s job to ensure people’s well-being; instead, Americans were to be responsible only for themselves and their own bodies. Entire industries, such as self-help and health foods, have sprung up on the principle that the key to good health lies in individuals making the right choices.
Of course, there’s a lot of good that comes from viewing health care decisions as personal choices: No one wants to be subjected to procedures against their wishes. But there are problems with reducing public health to a matter of choice. It gives the impression that individuals are wholly responsible for their own health. This is despite growing evidence that health is deeply influenced by factors outside our control; public health experts now talk about the “social determinants of health,” the idea that personal health is never simply just a reflection of individual lifestyle choices, but also the class people are born into, the neighborhood they grew up in and the race they belong to.
Mark Bittman & David L. Katz, writing for The Wall Street Journal:
The now-constant barrage of headlines about nutrition science can make us feel like we’re doing everything wrong. Some people respond by tuning out and continuing to eat what’s familiar. Others jump on the bandwagon of each thrilling new diet that promises everything. Most of these deliver temporary results from severe restrictions that no one can maintain. Rapid weight loss is followed by rapid regain, creating a desperation that makes people eager for the next promise of magic.
There is no one best diet. Good diets can be low or high in fat or carbohydrates, as long as they are made up of wholesome foods, and mostly plants. The quintessentially healthy Mediterranean diet is high in fat, most of it unsaturated, much of it from olive oil, nuts, seeds and avocado. But the famous diet of long-lived residents of Okinawa is low in fat because it is centered around diverse vegetables, grains and soybeans, with very limited meat, poultry and fish. If you adopt an eating pattern that has stood the test of generations, you are almost certain to be better off than with a diet introduced as breaking news.
Robin Dunbar, via Financial Times:
Like all monkeys and apes, humans are intensely social. We have an urgent desire to schmooze and an awareness that alcohol helps our cause. Friendships protect us against outside threats and internal stresses, and this has been key to our evolutionary success. Primate social groups, unlike most other animals, rely on bondedness to maintain social coherence. And for humans, this is where a shared bottle of red wine plays a powerful role.
So, if you want to know the secret of a long and happy life, money is not the right answer. Get rid of the takeaway in front of the telly, and bin the hasty sandwich at your desk — the important thing is to take time out with people you know and talk to them over a beer or two, even that bottle of Prosecco if you really must. There’s nothing quite like a convivial evening wrapped around a pint to give you health, happiness and a sense of well-being.